Ancients: Turn Sequence (again)

I've been thinking a bit more about the turn sequence for my Ancients game.

All wargame rules are a kind of illusion, suggesting as much as simulating the world the represent.  For this Ancients game, I want to suggest the tidal forces of massed infantry crashing across the field of battle, of simultaneous motion and action of each side, punctuated by sudden, decisive moments when cavalry charges or lines break.

As I indicated in my last post, I think there should be a certain predictability in the turn sequence and flow of the game.  Some games (like, say Malifaux or Bolt Action) randomize and alternate the turn order.  The result seems to me to isolate the different units from mutual support, since you can never entirely predict in which order units will move or shoot, or whether one unit will have an opportunity to act before another.  These systems reflect the unpredictability of skirmish combat and the fog of war.  But they also creates a battlefield in which tiny changes in luck propagate into massive, unpredictable results. 

Imagine a Bolt Action or Malifaux game in which you, as a player want to advance a line of three infantry  units for mutual support.  Whichever one moves first will be out on its own if the other player moves.  It could be charged in the flank before its companion units advance to cover it.  If the other player got to make several moves before you did, your advancing unit could be isolated and overwhelmed.  This doesn't seem like something that would happen in an actual ancient's battle, in which units near each other could presumably match pace fairly easily, and not allow each other to become isolated.

On the other hand, I'm also dissatisfied with the "Warhammer/FoW" I-Go/U-Go sequence in which a player's entire army moves through move, shoot, and melee phases.  The opposing player does not make many meaningful choices when it's not his turn, and mostly just rolls saves.  I think it's a little too predictable, and removes the illusion of simultanity.

So, I'm thinking the best compromise may be something like this:

1) Movement Phase:  Players A and B alternate moving groups of units.  Units that would naturally move together may be moved simultaneously.  So a line of infantry units and all its support units would move together, maintaining a coherent frontage.  The unpredictability would largely effect units operating separately: a cavalry unit working around the flank, a skirmish unit moving in the woods, those heavy huscarls waiting to countercharge, etc. 

Charges would be integrated into the Movement phase.  If a unit can reach its enemy, it is deemed to have charged.  There could be some out-of-sequence reactions, such as fleeing or counter-charging here.  Any such reaction would "use up" the unit's Movement for the turn.

2) Shooting Phase: Players A and B alternate shooting with their units.  There would be no massed fire from units near each other, preserving the illusion that both sides are raining arrows on each other at the same time.  Units which charged in the Movement phase remain valid targets for fire, even if they are in base contact with an enemy.  Certain units which fled may still shoot, if they are sneaky like that.

3) Melee Phase: Melees are resolved for units in base-to-base combat, with players A and B alternating in nominating a melee to resolve.

Different general abilities might modify the usual sequence: for example, an ability might allow a general to move two units before his opponent can react.

I toyed around with different sequences, for example with shooting before moving, but I think this traditional framework remains the most satisfying.